If they did I’d be more than happy to tell you about it. Good thing too. According to this story by Tim Arango in yesterdays New York Times, bloggers may soon be required to fully disclose any compensation they receive from advertisers and marketers.
“The F.T.C. said that beginning on Dec. 1, bloggers who review products must disclose any connection with advertisers, including, in most cases, the receipt of free products and whether or not they were paid in any way by advertisers, as occurs frequently.”
Really?
Nobody has ever given Tales of Two Cities anything but comments. That is not to say I won’t accept stuff if anyone was adventurous enough to seek my opinion about their stuff. I respect all readers of this blog and I pledge to you that I will always disclose any connection with an advertiser and anyone who gives me free stuff.
I would just expect that you would say something if you received a fee for a blog post. We may disagree on some things, but you have always be scrupulous in your disclosures, and transparent about you motivations and actions. Good on ya.
ReplyDelete"you have always been..."
ReplyDeleteYo, Bob. "Good on ya"?? Are you from Australia, or just the mid-west?
ReplyDelete"nobody gives me squat". That is a great title and I bet anyone who saw this title had to read the post. Ordinarily I just like reading comments, but this struck my funny bone.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if we have to disclose guff, high blood-pressure or gray hair? I think it's safe to say that I've received all three...
ReplyDeleteOK
ReplyDeleteWhy is the agency looking for compensation? Is this the beginning of regulation? Does compensation act as a precursor of regulatory action? Gentlemen, if you voted for change, this may be the beginning. There may be no "anonymous" when Tales of Two Cities becomes regulated.
Are I being paranoid or is change here?
HH
I've just spent a lot of time Down Under, mate. Hand me that tinnie, and get us another flat!
ReplyDeleteAnd "Anonymous" is great for some things, but for legitimate public discourse, I think we each have to stand on our own public soapboxes.
There really are no anonymati, or at least not many. When you post under a pseudonym, (nom de plume or whatever) you leave yourself open to hijacking by those who disagree and wish to discredit your position in meaningful discussion. I could post as Bob O and say outrageous things, like WB is an old coot. While neither you nor I would ever say such a thing, it would be attributed to you. Anons add much to the discussion even while the toms, dicks, and harrys wish it wasn't so.
ReplyDelete